Re: laugh test: Detecting Network Attachment (DNA) BoF Proposal

["James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>]

Thomas,

I support this effort and I believe that the topic is timely and worthwhile
discussing. The issue of attachment/reattachement has been a thorny one for
Mobile IPv6, especially in the last few months of trying to get the spec
finished.

However, a few IETFs back, there was some talk in the IPv6 WG about taking
another look at RFC 2461/2462 in the light of what has been learned and
additional problems that have arisen since these went to PS, not in IPv6
itself but perhaps in a separate WG. If a working group should arise from
the DNA BOF, do you see it as orthogonal to work on revisiting ND or as a
vehicle for accomplishing that? Or, perhaps thinking has changed and a
revisiting of RFC 2461/2462 is now deemed unnecessary?

            jak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas Narten" <narten@us.ibm.com>
To: <iab@iab.org>; <iesg@ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:15 AM
Subject: laugh test: Detecting Network Attachment (DNA) BoF Proposal


> This is an area where I think we need work done. there is a lot of
> current practice/experience with detecting when one (re)attaches to a
> network. But our specs have gaps (e.g., DHC doesn't  have good
> guidance on what to do upon reconnecting and some implementations hang
> on to leases that don't make sense anymore).
>
> Big goal of this bof is to try and get diverse sets of players (e.g.,
> from mobile IP and DHC) to work together and develop
> practices/recommendations that are generic to IP, but maybe used by
> higher layer customers differently (e.g., road warrior who just wants
> an address that works vs. MIP movement that needs a new COA).
>
> Thomas
>
>
>     * To: dna@eng.monash.edu.au
>     * Subject: [DNA-BOF] Detecting Network Attachment BoF description (rev
2)
>     * From: Gregory Daley <Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au>
>     * Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 22:26:39 +1000
>     * Sender: owner-dna@ecselists.eng.monash.edu.au
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is a description of the potential BoF,
> with some changes to the goals, to say a few more
> things about applicability of DNA.
>
> It is still a bit hand-waving, but the agenda
> (when created) will have more details, and will
> provide context for some of these goals.
>
> Greg
> ---
>
> Detecting Network Attachment (DNA) BOF:
> Meeting Description:
>
> Network Attachment occurs when a host arrives on
> a new IP subnet. When attaching to a network, a
> host either has current configuration for this
> subnet or must configure addresses. A host determines
> whether it requires additional configuration by
> Detecting Network Attachment.
>
> When a host has existing upper layer protocols
> sessions, it is important to receive a timely
> indication that attachment has occurred. This may be
> the case if a host is connected intermittently, is
> moving or has urgent data to transmit upon attachment
> to a link.
>
> For these nodes, it is also important detect if an
> acquired link is new, or has already been visited.
> This information may be used to distinguish between
> events where configuration must be initiated, or a
> host already has valid configuration.
>
> This meeting hopes to providing a forum for those
> interested in developing generic attachment detection
> technologies for IPv4 and IPv6.
>
>
> The BOF aims to:
>
>   * Describe existing issues encountered in DHC,
>     ZEROCONF and Mobileip WGs, which could benefit
>     from work on detecting network attachment.
>
>   * Determine applicability of network attachment
>     detection to providing configuration hints for
>     network and upper layer protocols.
>
>   * Define link layer technologies and network
>     topologies where network attachment detection
>     is desirable.
>
>   * Determine if sufficient interest exists to form
>     a Working Group on this topic.
>
>   * Reach consensus on the area of work for a
>     potential WG, including which problems are outside
>     scope.
>
>
>
>
> Thomas
>
>